T.v.

[Mike E]

Yeah Thoros was the other Red Priest. Paul Kaye (who plays him) is who I wanted to replace Matt Smith as Dr Who. Maybe he'll eventually replace Capaldi.

[T J Hooker]

sorry I cant stand paul kaye, just something about his face annoys me(and he's an ginger bleep) he was good as dennis pennis though(playing an annoying smug character suited him)

Edited June 17, 2015 by T J Batty Man

[Mike E]

sorry I cant stand paul kaye, just something about his face annoys me(and he's an ginger bleep) he was good as dennis pennis though(playing an annoying smug character suited him)

I just love how weird and sinister he looks. Wasn't keen on those sodding VictorChandler ads he did though.

[Beta Ray Bill]

Wouldn't hold your breath about Paul Kaye replacing Capaldi as he's guesting in the next series. They'd never cast a guest star a few years later as the lead.

On the books vs series, is the divergence really that important? Then again I am still a bit miffed that the Marvel Cinematic Universe isn't following every detail of 53 years of comic continuity...

[Amo]

On the books vs series, is the divergence really that important?

When the adaptation subverts the characters and themes of the original work, then yes I'd say it's mighty important.

Of course, as long there's plenty of tits and cheap shock value, little things like character development, narrative logic and consistency matter not.

Then again I am still a bit miffed that the Marvel Cinematic Universe isn't following every detail of 53 years of comic continuity...

That's a completely valid analogy... not.

[Mike E]

When the adaptation subverts the characters and themes of the original work, then yes I'd say it's mighty important.

Of course, as long there's plenty of tits and cheap shock value, little things like character development, narrative logic and consistency matter not.

Tbf, a lot of things get cut out of books-to-TV adaptations. It's what makes the books so much better everytime.

Personally, I understand the fact that they refuse to cast over 1000 characters for a 10-episode series, 'because muneh'. Plus the CGI budget which they already struggle to juggle.

No greater source than GRRM himself has said that the books and TV show are different tellings of the same story with the same major plot points. That'll do for me.

I've come across my first proper deviation from the books, reading Clash of Kings last night. It isn't Bronn at all that takes Command of the City Watch from Slynt. But it made TV sense.

If both stories make sense and tell the same tale, what does it matter that Santa was raped by Ramsay instead of a non-existent Jeyne (who hardly features at all in the books anyway)?

Edited June 18, 2015 by Mike Ellison

[T J Hooker]

At the end of the day george r martin has written and produced a lot of the show up until the last season and i doubt anything has been changed or cut out without his blessing(all be it maybe a little begrudgingly at times)

Edited June 18, 2015 by T J Batty Man

[Beta Ray Bill]

When the adaptation subverts the characters and themes of the original work, then yes I'd say it's mighty important.

Of course, as long there's plenty of tits and cheap shock value, little things like character development, narrative logic and consistency matter not.

That's a completely valid analogy... not.

There is not one single film or tv adaptation that could ever totally replicate a book. It is a totally different medium, narrative structures are vastly different, and audiences require different stimuli.

There is nothing wrong with anyone only liking one or the other, but if you're dismissive of a tv series purely because it isn't 100% reflective of the source material, then how do you view Bond films? Or Gone With the Wind? Or... anything?

The tv series of GoT diverges on page 1. How old are Jon and Robb? And Dany? It could never do on screen what's on the page. Sneer all you want, but for many the TV version is the only version. And that is all that matters to those fans.

And the MU analogy is totally valid. It us a different universe with similar characters and plots. But it is impossible to do the 50+ years continuity in a few movies. Or more precisely,even bring a single plot line or issue, on screen in the exact manner and storytelling. It has to be adapted for the screen and things change.

Some fans won't watch the films because it's not 'real', as if their vision of a pure MU is the only valid one. That's effectively what you're saying about GoT. Dislike the programme all you want but it's rather bizarre to criticise primarily based on it not being a book.

Tbf, a lot of things get cut out of books-to-TV adaptations. It's what makes the books so much better everytime.

Personally, I understand the fact that they refuse to cast over 1000 characters for a 10-episode series, 'because muneh'. Plus the CGI budget which they already struggle to juggle.

No greater source than GRRM himself has said that the books and TV show are different tellings of the same story with the same major plot points. That'll do for me.

I've come across my first proper deviation from the books, reading Clash of Kings last night. It isn't Bronn at all that takes Command of the City Watch from Slynt. But it made TV sense.

If both stories make sense and tell the same tale, what does it matter that Santa was raped by Ramsay instead of a non-existent Jeyne (who hardly features at all in the books anyway)?

Santa was raped?!

That's one horrible Christmas image!

[Mike E]

Santa was raped?!

That's one horrible Christmas image!

I love autocorrect haha!

[Amo]

At the end of the day george r martin has written and produced a lot of the show up until the last season and i doubt anything has been changed or cut out without his blessing(all be it maybe a little begrudgingly at times)

GRRM's involvement in the show has been dwindling. He didn't even write an episode this season. There have even been some veiled digs at the showrunners on his blog. However, he is ultimately the one to blame. He sold the rights of his magnum opus before he'd finished it.

There is not one single film or tv adaptation that could ever totally replicate a book.

Strawman. This is the standard recourse for apologists of the TV show. Understandably, they would have to trim some of the fat from the books to fit it to screen, but this isn't the issue. It's the pointless thematic changes they've made to the plot and its characters that are a betrayal of the source material, which frankly deserves so much better than cheap HBO fanfiction.

There is nothing wrong with anyone only liking one or the other, but if you're dismissive of a tv series purely because it isn't 100% reflective of the source material, then how do you view Bond films? Or Gone With the Wind? Or... anything?

Again, strawman. Not once have I, or any critics of the show, asked for a literal adaptation.

The tv series of GoT diverges on page 1. How old are Jon and Robb? And Dany? It could never do on screen what's on the page.

If you're going to debate with someone at least stick to the points and not pull up complaints I haven't even made. Also, ageing up the characters was more of a practical matter because it would be difficult to film a 15 year-old chick getting railed by a barbarian warlord.

And the MU analogy is totally valid. It us a different universe with similar characters and plots. But it is impossible to do the 50+ years continuity in a few movies. Or more precisely,even bring a single plot line or issue, on screen in the exact manner and storytelling. It has to be adapted for the screen and things change.

No, it's not valid at all. Comic books have a multiverse wherein there are numerous interpretations of the same characters and storylines. ASOIAF isn't a comic book franchise, it's a series of novels with one overarching plot.

[Beta Ray Bill]

GRRM's involvement in the show has been dwindling. He didn't even write an episode this season. There have even been some veiled digs at the showrunners on his blog. However, he is ultimately the one to blame. He sold the rights of his magnum opus before he'd finished it.

Strawman. This is the standard recourse for apologists of the TV show. Understandably, they would have to trim some of the fat from the books to fit it to screen, but this isn't the issue. It's the pointless thematic changes they've made to the plot and its characters that are a betrayal of the source material, which frankly deserves so much better than cheap HBO fanfiction.

Again, strawman. Not once have I, or any critics of the show, asked for a literal adaptation.

If you're going to debate with someone at least stick to the points and not pull up complaints I haven't even made. Also, ageing up the characters was more of a practical matter because it would be difficult to film a 15 year-old chick getting railed by a barbarian warlord.

No, it's not valid at all. Comic books have a multiverse wherein there are numerous interpretations of the same characters and storylines. ASOIAF isn't a comic book franchise, it's a series of novels with one overarching plot.

I have not read all of the books yet. I enjoy both media as do the majority of readers/viewers.

It is quite perplexing that someone tries to take the moral high ground for an entertainment form. Almost as if there's some intellectual snobbery going on, but you'd never be egotistical enough to think your views are the only ones that matter, would you?

Edited June 23, 2015 by Beta Ray Bill

[T J Hooker]

GRRM's involvement in the show has been dwindling. He didn't even write an episode this season. There have even been some veiled digs at the showrunners on his blog. However, he is ultimately the one to blame. He sold the rights of his magnum opus before he'd finished it.

Strawman. This is the standard recourse for apologists of the TV show. Understandably, they would have to trim some of the fat from the books to fit it to screen, but this isn't the issue. It's the pointless thematic changes they've made to the plot and its characters that are a betrayal of the source material, which frankly deserves so much better than cheap HBO fanfiction.

Again, strawman. Not once have I, or any critics of the show, asked for a literal adaptation.

If you're going to debate with someone at least stick to the points and not pull up complaints I haven't even made. Also, ageing up the characters was more of a practical matter because it would be difficult to film a 15 year-old chick getting railed by a barbarian warlord.

No, it's not valid at all. Comic books have a multiverse wherein there are numerous interpretations of the same characters and storylines. ASOIAF isn't a comic book franchise, it's a series of novels with one overarching plot.

you make it sound like the books are literary masterpieces! from what I gather they are very entertaining but they're hardly original or particularly well written, he's just mashed up lots of ideas from all the great fantasy novels of the past and there's nowt wrong with that but he's no Tolkien.

[Mike E]

you make it sound like the books are literary masterpieces! from what I gather they are very entertaining but they're hardly original or particularly well written, he's just mashed up lots of ideas from all the great fantasy novels of the past and there's nowt wrong with that but he's no Tolkien.

Hardly literary masterpieces, I agree but they're a terrific work. I'd argue in the same league as Tolkien for sure.

I've had more enjoyment from the whole ASOIAF canon and TV than I ever got from LOTR and I consider myself a fan of that too.

[Mattyblue]

The whole Middle-Earth thing seems very twee compared to the GRRM universe.

Wonder if the Lord ut Rings films would have taken off in the same way if released now?

[T J Hooker]

Hmmmm, i doubt it, but o havent read any of the got books so will have to take your word.

[Mike E]

The whole Middle-Earth thing seems very twee compared to the GRRM universe.

Wonder if the Lord ut Rings films would have taken off in the same way if released now?

I suspect not tbh. You could maybe look at The Hobbit by way of comparison. Nowhere near the appeal of GoT imo. Now Hobbit is most certainly a series of films that do the book no justice at all imo.

[Tom]

The whole Middle-Earth thing seems very twee compared to the GRRM universe.

Wonder if the Lord ut Rings films would have taken off in the same way if released now?

Possibly not but would game of thrones be popular without Lord of the rings?

[ultrablue]

I've read the first book and tried to get through the others, but for me they are just so tedious. The structure of POV chapters is jarring as the focus jumps back and forth from place to place, plot to plot, with little payback for the effort it takes to get through another chapter of someone walking, fighting, then camping for the night. I found myself skipping page after page.

But that same structure has worked excellently on TV. The episodic format with cliffhangers once a week has hooked millions into the story. The books hold a lot of depth for hardcore followers who have committed themselves. But for the majority, the story belongs on TV, and may well be one of the most successful shows ever.

[Mike E]

Possibly not but would game of thrones be popular without Lord of the rings?

Gratuitous violence and soft porn? Duh!

[T J Hooker]

Really though, lord of the rings(movies & books) Game of thrones(tv show and books) are all great in there own right.(if you like fantasy that is, I know people that simply cant watch fantasy shows/movies, they just find it all silly) hopefully the next generation of starwars films will at least give them a run for there money in the fantasy entertainment stakes.

[T J Hooker]

Yeah Thoros was the other Red Priest. Paul Kaye (who plays him) is who I wanted to replace Matt Smith as Dr Who. Maybe he'll eventually replace Capaldi.

ive just started watching series 2 of Lillyhammer, Paul kaye is brilliant in the 1st episode, playing a right nasty cockney *bleep*

[Glenn]

Santa was raped?!

That's one horrible Christmas image!

Sounds like a deleted scene from the brillaint Rare Exports

I love autocorrect haha!

The internet is waaaay ahead on this one

http://chapmangamo.tumblr.com/post/120973975340/a-collection-of-alternate-game-of-thrones-names

(BTW check out his entire tumblr, he's loads of original funny stuff like this)

[Glenn]

I've finally started The West Wing. Seems a very very different proposition to House of Cards (US) which I've loved so far.

[ABBEY]

Thought west wing was boring but liking

Madame Seceretry

Edited July 19, 2015 by ABBEY

[T J Hooker]

I really want to watch all of the x-files before this new series of it starts, I watched the first 2 seasons when it originally aired but then lost track and never got back into it(remember back then how hard it was to follow American shows on sky 1 before sky+ and dvd boxsets existed)

I need to watch it right back from the beginning though but im finding the 1st season now looks so dated its hard to get into and there's so many seasons of it(proper long seasons as well like us shows back then all had)